First accelerate particles to near the speed of light, and then let the particles enter a decelerating electric field.
If the particles decelerate very slowly(very slowly=in accordance with special relativity), it proves that the speed/mass relationship of the theory of relativity is correct.
If the particles decelerate very quickly(very quickly= more quickly than predicated by special relativity), it proves that the speed/mass relationship of the theory of relativity is wrong.
Because, according to theory of relativity, the mass/energy/momentum(inertia) of particles will increase dramtically at near the speed of light, the particles will be decelerated very slowly inside decelerating electric field due to their hugely increased mass/energy/momentum(inertia). Thus if the particles can be decelerated very quickly, this means the mass/energy/momentum(inertia) of the particles has not increased. Therefore the speed/mass relationship of the theory of relativity must be incorrect.
Detailed discussion can be found at: 10.5281/zenodo.4781247
Thank you very much for your kind attention.(If you can actually do this experiment with or without my participation, I will be very happy to see it happen)
Dear Xinghong,
Indeed, you defined the right experiment to demonstrate the invalidity of the SR concept that mass does not increase with velocity.
The answer will be given by the energy that will be required to slow it down.
Note that engineers who have to develop applications involving control of the trajectories of free moving electrons always used the right Lorentz force equation to control their trajectories with the highest precision. In short, they do not use the SR equation, because SR does not take into account the transverse magnetic energy which is induced at the same time as the momentum energy when accelerating electrons, a transverse energy corresponding to the second term of the Lorentz force equation, and that has the same omnidirectional inertia as the energy of the rest mass of the electron, that consequently can be measured longitudinally as well as transversely, contrary to the momentum energy that can be measured only longitudinally.
Longitudinally, both variable induced quantities are physically measurable longitudinally in addition to the electron rest mass, while the SR equation, accounts only for the momentum energy in addition to the electron rest mass.
Best Regards, André
It never happened as results to the experiment because the relative charge density
Dear André,
Thank you a lot for your insightful answer.
If this experiment can be use to prove that mass does not increase with velocity as per SR, then the whole system of SR is fundamentally flawed.
And the time dilation and length contraction effect, as well as mass/velocity relationship, are all deductions from Lorentz transformation. Thus, if mass/velocity relationship is incorrect, time dilation and length contraction are all nonexistent.
I hope to have the honor to cooperate with you and receiving support from you on this subject.
Thanks again sincerely.
BR,
Xinghong
Xinghong Wang
Dear Xinghong,
The time-dilation/length-contraction concept of SR is an application of the gamma factor used in replacement of the experimentally confirmed Kaufmann data that reveals that this occurrence of the gamma factor applies in reality to the increase in transverse magnetic energy induced as the same time as momentum energy, according to the Lorentz force equation. So if this transverse energy that also is measurable longitudinally in addition to the momentum energy, itself also induced according to a separate occurrence of the gamma factor, then if this amount of energy can be proven as the exact quantity required to slow an electron down, then SR is disproved de facto.
This comes out of the analysis carried out by Lorentz himself in his 1904 paper. Seems that the community paid attention only to the transformation theorized about by Lorentz in this paper but that nobody studied his analysis of the Kaufmann data in the same paper before Einstein published his 1905 paper. They paid attention later, but Einstein rejected this analysis as only marginally important, even if no fault was found later by Abraham, Lorentz and Planck with this analysis of Kaufmann's data.
The Lorentz conclusion has been confirmed by more than a hundred years of repeated confirmation by all applications successfully developed by engineers that require the highest precision of trajectory control over free moving electrons that they resolve only by means of the Lorentz force equation. I think that nothing can beat a proof by repeated successful application of well understood physical laws.
For more on this analysis, you can analyze yourself his equations (30) and associated comment about mass m1 and mass m2.
My own analysis of this issue is available in Section 2 of this paper soon to be formally published. All pertaining papers are available in the Reference section.
Note that I have no standing in the community, but for what it is worth, I fully support you in your project.
Best Regards, André
Olivier denis,
In the face of gravity, the speed of light is very slow.
Preprint Gravitational Fields and Gravitational Waves
Preprint Why Morley Experiment Could Not Observe the Movement of Inte...
GR is a mathematical model of static gravity. SR is a theory based on the false assumption that the speed of light is constant.
If the weakest gravitational wave can raise the fluctuation of the LIGO interference fringe of light, how must we neglect the gravitational field influences on light? We raise the possibility that light is influenced by the Earth’s gravitational field. In this way, the Morley Experiment cannot observe the movement of interference fringe either in the air or in a vacuum environment.
Preprint Why Morley Experiment Could Not Observe the Movement of Inte...
This article provides a detailed analysis in several parts:
the influence of water on the speed of a car;
the influence of air on light propagation;
the influence of gravitational field on light propagation;
Eddington Observation;
mass-energy equation;
fiber optic gyroscope; and,
explanation of the Sagnac effect.
Xinghong Wang
Dear Wang, if I understand your setup correctly - which might not be the case - this setup is similar to the famous Kaufman experiment done around 1900, which seemed to confirm the relativistic mass increase.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaufmann–Bucherer–Neumann_experiments
Instead of a mass increase due to velocity, the experiment can also be interpreted as a reduction in the acting force on the particle depending on the absolute velocity of the particle. In the following paper I discuss this thought in Section VI. A.
Preprint Quantum Gravity and Absolute Motion Through Discretization o...
Hi Dr Xinghong Wang . It could be because by experiment you can approve or disapprove any rules and principles .
Aref Wazwaz
Dear Aref, if I may add: according to Karl Popper any experiment can only falsify a theory, but never verify it. If a theory passes one test after another, you have a good feeling about it, but in a strict sense it is still not verified.
- Badges
- Science topic